I am beginning an analysis of available data in IR, UV, cosmic, and x-ray to determine if there is a vector pattern which represents an indicator of advanced life throughout the universe. I am using the same techniques that I developed for dealing with images as vectors of colors and from that, pattern recognition of elements that are unique. There are many levels to data and it seems from the surface analysis that there is a pattern there that implies a system. It can be as much in the shadow of data as the data itself. Lack of certain effects can be just as significant as the presence.

I am also using a new algorithm I developed as a result of studying some riddles. It can be implied that you are dealing with intelligence and that they would be required to make the same analysis as we must. As a result it becomes a recursive process of understanding of their understanding. Very much like predicting the movement of an enemy in war. It is also very much like three people of different eye color, who cannot see their own reflection. In order to solve for the complete knowledge it is necessary to have a direct or indirect indicator. It is very much like a triangle, where if two sides and the connecting angle are known, then it is solved. It is also like the solution of a set of equations with a missing variable.

The intelligence to understand the universe, is hypothesized to be present, and then a model is made that reflects the result. If the data matches one of the projected hypotheses then the idea that intelligence is at work, would be a reasonable assumption.

The idea that we live in a universe of 1022 stars and that all of that is just cold dead rock is just too improbable for me to entertain, unless I was to observe it. It is my beginning assumption that the data shows the existence of other life. It is the lack of skill or imagination in arranging the data that is the problem. I think it can be attributed to a psychological deterrent. People do not want to know that a race exists that is billions of years more advanced, as it would make us feel small and ineffective in comparison. I say, if it is so, bring it on. To deny that which is obvious because it offends, is worse.

Given the scale of the universe, I would assume that this riddle has been posed and solved many times and the answer is what determines the next step.

Just from the briefest of analysis it is obvious that major correlations have been missed and I must assume that it is the guiding hand of the experimenter, which desires, not the truth, but that which is an economic or psychological advantage. The experimenter and his motives cannot be separated from the experiments in which he participates. I hope that I can be impartial and that is all it is, hope to be impartial, as I am human.